Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21075 of 2021 Applicant :- Kishan Verma Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Counsel for Applicant :- Sharique Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
The matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing.
Heard Sri Sharique Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri J.B. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State who have appeared through Video Conferencing and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Kishan Verma, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Rail Bazar, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that the applicant is not named in the first information report. It is further argued that the first information report has been registered on 2.1.2021 at 21.19 hours regarding missing of Ashu Yadav who is the deceased by Km. Shanu Yadav for which missing report was earlier registered at the police station in G.D No.48 at 17.29 hours on 1.1.2021, the said missing report was subsequently registered as first information report under Section 302, 201 I.P.C. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The implication of the applicant surfaced for the first time in the present matter in the confessional statement of co-accused Sachin after which the applicant was arrested and the police has shown the recovery of a rope on the pointing out of the applicant, the recovery of the said rope has been shown by the police from the house of co- accused Amit Gupta for which applicant has no concern and is neither the occupant nor is in any manner having any dominion over the said place from where the said rope was recovered. It is further argued that the said recovery as shown on the own showing of the police is after procuring the keys of the said house from the mother of co-accused Amit Gupta, the said recovery is false just in order to falsely implicate the applicant and even further there is no corroboration of the use of the said rope in the present matter. It is further argued that co-accused Sachin Verma has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.3.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11437 of 2021, copy of the said order is annexed as annexure no.19 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is further argued that the present case is of circumstantial evidence without any eye-witness to the incident and the links in the chain are conspicuously missing. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history and is in jail since 5.1.2021.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the rope used in the present crime has been got recovered on the pointing out of the present applicant from the house of co-accused Amit Gupta. It is further argued that the dead-body of the deceased has been recovered from the car but the recovery of rope has been done on the pointing out of the applicant, hence the prayer for bail be rejected.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is not named in the first information report, the present case is of circumstantial evidence, the implication of the applicant has surfaced for the first time in the present matter in the confessional statement of co-accused Sachin Verma who has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, the alleged rope which is said to have been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant from the house of co- accused Amit Gupta was after obtaining keys from his mother which shows that the said house was not under the control of the applicant and the case of the applicant is distinguishable from the co-accused Amit Gupta.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Kishan Verma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 25.5.2021 Gaurav Digitally signed by Justice Samit Gopal Date: 2021.05.26 11:27:52 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad